Allahabad Court November 2003 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sandeep Palace Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC329
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned orders dated 19.12.1995 and 18.8.2003, passed by the statutory authorities under the Entertainment Tax Act, rejecting the application of the petitioner for grant-in-aid scheme.2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner filed an application on 22.1.1981 before the statutory authority under the Cinematography Act to permit him to raise the construction of a cinema hall and he also submitted the sanction plan. Construction of the cinema hall was completed and he was granted the licence to exhibit the films. He filed an application or granting the benefit of grant-in-aid scheme in terms of the Government Orders dated 21.7.1986 and 8.9.1986 (Annexures-1 and 2). However, his application was not considered. Being aggrieved, he approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 23844 of 1991 and some interim order was passed in his favour. As the matter was not decided, he filed anoth...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. U.P. Public Services Tribuna ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC335; (2004)IILLJ117All
ORDERM. Katju, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order of the U.P. Public Service Tribunal dated 20.9.1985 Annexure-5 to the writ petition. The respondent No. 2 was a temporary bus driver in the service of the U.P. Roadways and he was sent on deputation to the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation when the corporation was created. The service of the respondent No. 2 was terminated by order dated 6.1.1977 copy of which is Annexure-2 to the petition. He challenged that order before the Tribunal which allowed his petition by the impugned order dated 20.9.1985. In the impugned order of the Tribunal it has been observed that the termination order is illegal as it is punitive in nature and was passed without giving opportunity of hearing. We do not agree with the view taken by the Tribunal. There is no dispute that the petitioner was only a temporary employee as has been stated in the termination order dated 6.1.1977 and that has also be...
Yaqub Khan and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC528
M. Katju and R. S. Tripathi, JJ 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties,2. The petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of U.P. Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Ordinance, 2002, which has been replaced by U.P. Act No. 4 of 2003, Copy of the said amendment has been annexed as Annexure-12A with the Application for Amendment, which has been allowed today.3. The constitutional validity of the impugned Ordinance and Act have been upheld by several Division Benches of this Court e.g., H.C. Misra v. State of U.P., 2000 ALJ 2627 ; Smt. Vidya Gupta v. State of U.P., C.M. Writ Petition No. 1025 of 2001 (Tax), decided on 10.9.2002 and Gokul Prasad Rai and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors., C.M. Writ Petition No. 12 of 2003 (Tax), decided on 16.1.2003, etc.4. Shri H. N. Singh learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in this petition, the petitioners have taken a different ground, which was not taken in the writ petitions referred to above. He has submitted that the earlier decisio...
Rehman Ahmad Khan Vs. D.i.O.S. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC408; (2004)1UPLBEC914
Vineet Saran, J.1. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 8.1.1998 passed by the District Inspector of Schools. Kushi Nagar, respondent No. 1, whereby the financial approval for the appointment of the petitioner has been refused.2. It is the case of the petitioner that a short-term vacancy in L.T. grade arose on 6.7.1997 due to the ad hoc promotion on one Bhagwati Misra on the post of Hindi Lecturer in Nehru Intermediate College Semari-Sukrauli district Kushl Nagar (hereinafter referred to as the respondent-institution). On the very next day, i.e., 7.7.1997. It is alleged that the vacancy was notified on the notice-board of the respondent institution and allegedly an intimation was also sent to the District Inspector of Schools. It has also been stated that the said vacancy was also advertised in a local newspaper 'Deoria Doot' on 11.7.1997. Thereafter the selection is said to have been held on 17.8.1997 in accordance with the provisions of the Sec...
Smt. Kalawati Vs. Chief Nagar Officer, Nagar Nigam and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC934
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.2. This writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 19.1.2002 passed by the opposite party No. 3 as contained in Annexure-1 and further for a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to appoint the petitioner on any class IV post and pay her salary regularly.3. Petitioner claims appointment under the Dying-in-Harness Rules. The husband of the petitioner was working as daily wage employee in Lucknow Nagar Nigam as Safayee Karamchari who died on 1.8.2001. Petitioner being wife of the deceased applied for appointment under the Dying-in-Harness Rules, which are applicable in the case of the petitioner. The petitioner has filed the copy of U.P. Government Servant Dying in Harness Rules, 1974 and averred in the petition that these Rules are applicable in the matters of employees of Nagar Nigam. The application for appointment has been rejected by Regional Health Office...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›